Goodbye internet, whatever did we do without you?

[kandrathe]

... what it opens up is companies getting preferential access to bandwidth.

Does it ensure that Netflix and Hulu get charged the same rate? If not, cannot Comcast give Netflix a low rate, and give Hulu a higher rate? What happens if a bandwidth provider also owns content distribution? Wouldn't they give themselves the best bandwidth for cost, and shut out their competitors who must pay for bandwidth?

The FCC exists because back in the advent of radio, with enough power you could overpower the little stations for hundreds of miles around your broadcast tower. They regulated the frequency, and the power output at various times of day even. Bandwidth was a limited resource, and they licensed it some what fairly. It's odd for a libertarian like me to advocate for regulators, but these limited resource (inter)national infrastructures (wires, pipelines, highways, rails, air traffic) cry for an objectively managed approach. There are times when the laissez-faire, some what anarchic model forces better competition where the consumer benefits most. Sometimes regulation (e.g. enforcing an artificial shortage) causes massive price distortions where markets (and consumers) suffer.

I believe that neutrality for the internet means every data packet should be treated equally by the network. A few years ago I helped set up a multi-state private network for VOIP, and to enable a bunch of radio stations to share a common audio content database. There is already the means to buy big pipes if you desire, they are just private and not on the internet. If Netflix can pay Comcast to shape packets such that theirs have higher priority, it means less for everything else (games, skype, youtube, vimeo, twitch, whatever).

Like I said above, if you have the $$ to buy the access you will be in the dedicated fast lane, if not, you'll be stuck in traffic.